Posted on 01/30/2003 10:24:04 PM PST by MHGinTN
The President called for a ban on cloning in his State of the Union Address. So, what's wrong with cloning?
Every individual life is a continuum hallmarked by growth and development. We are invited, through the media, to differentiate reproductive cloning from therapeutic cloning, but both conceive a cloned individual human being, in vitro. Scientists seeking to exploit therapeutic cloning would have us believe that, because their goal doesn't include life support to the birth stage, their 'form' of cloning is okay. Far from it; it's a worse application of the technology. Therapeutic cloning seeks to conceive 'designer' individual human beings, give them life support either in a growth medium or a woman's body, then kill and harvest from these individuals the target tissues for which the cloned being was conceived.
It is important to realize that an embryo IS an individual human being: goals of cloning scientists bear witness to the hidden truth that they are conceiving a unique human being, whether for reproductive or therapeutic aims. Giving tacit acceptance to a proven lie --that the embryo is not an individual human life-- is bad enough, we’ve done this for more than thirty years, but to embrace cannibalism founded on such a lie is far more degenerate.
Tacit acceptance for manipulating individual human life has lead from in vitro fertilization to partial birth infanticide, proving the bankruptcy of continuing moderate acceptance. We are now staring at cannibalism in the name of whatever you care to call it. Even an embryo no bigger than a grain of sugar is an individual human life. Is it acceptable to kill that individual for their body parts? If you think that it is, at least know that it is cannibalism.
And sneakypete answers in a superstitious mode,"Jesus?".
Jesus? Do I win a prize?
Uhhh,I think there may be certain parts of that one already available commercially.
Artifact.
--President Ronald Reagan spoke with Conviction about abortion and the Right to life of the unborn. In fact, he even issued a Proclamation of Their Personhood and Dignity Following are a few other brief Excerpts from his comments.
"My Administration is dedicated to the preservation of America as a Free land, and there is no cause More important for preserving That freedom than affirming the transcendent right to life of all human beings, the right without which no other rights have any meaning." Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation First Appeared in The Human Life Review Spring 1983
"Every legislator, every doctor, and every citizen needs to recognize that the real issue is whether to affirm and protect the sanctity of all human life, or to embrace a social ethic where some human lives are valued and others are not. As a nation, we must choose between the sanctity of life ethic and the 'quality of life' ethic. IBID.
More from Renauldus Maximus
"The real question today is not when human life begins, but, What is the value of human life? The abortionist who reassembles the arms and legs of a tiny baby to make sure all its parts have been torn from its mother's body can hardly doubt whether it is a human being. The real question for him and for all of us is whether that tiny human life has a God-given right to be protected by the law -- the same right we have." IBID.
"I have often said that when we talk about abortion, we are talking about two lives -- the life of the mother and the life of the unborn child. Why else do we call a pregnant woman a mother? I have also said that anyone who doesn't feel sure whether we are talking about a second human life should clearly give life the benefit of the doubt. If you don't know whether a body is alive or dead, you would never bury it. I think this consideration itself should be enough for all of us to insist on protecting the unborn." IBID.
"A Senate committee hearing was held recently to determine, if we can, when life actually begins. And there was exhaustive testimony of experts presenting both views, and finally the result was declared inconclusive. They couldn't arrive at an answer. Well, in my view alone, they did arrive at an answer, an answer that justifies the proposed (human life) legislation. If it's true we don't know when the unborn becomes a human life, then we have to opt in favor that it is a human life until someone proves it isn't." Remarks at the Centennial Meeting of the Supreme Council of the Knights of Columbus Hartford, CT 8/3/82
"And I just happen to believe that simple morality dictates that unless and until someone can prove the unborn human is not alive, we must give it the benefit of the doubt and assume it is. And thus, it should be entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Remarks at the Alfred M. Landon Lecture Series on Public Issues Manhattan, KS 9/9/82
Please read Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation by Ronald Reagan
“Ronald Reagan, while sitting as the fortieth president of the United States, sent us this article shortly after the tenth anniversary of Roe v. Wade; we printed it with pride in our Spring, 1983 issue, and reprint it now, after Roe's twentieth anniversary, just as proudly.”
realpatriot71, your home page says that you are a med student and that you are….pro-life! These children being operated on are not self aware yet. Are they expendable under your sentience is the true descriptive factor of being a human being.
This culture Desperately needs you to be a great pro-life doc! PLEASE learn the truth. Then live and practice it in your field without compromise!
Your friend and fellow patriot
When Dolly was conceived, the chromosomal data inserted into the denucleated ovum was 'aged', had used many of the telomeres leaving less for a full lifetime than if the sheep had been conceived from original male and female gametes.
Also, within the cell are mitochondrial grains which contain genetic material unique to the female's ancestry but not the 'drivers' of growth and development for the ages the conceptus goes through. The uneven timeline is the problematic issue with cloning at present, though an enzyme, Telemerase, which re-starts the clock of telomeres has been discovered. Until ALL problems are solved with higher non-human mammals, no human reproductive cloning should be legal, for starters.
I hope that helps. There is a bit more detail in the essay posted on my profile age, if anyone is interested.
I hereby nominate MHGinTN to head the FR department of biology, genetics etc.
Now I must get an icepack, I tink I tore a telomere!
1. You certainly were differentiated - unique, in fact.
2. As for no self awareness... how do you know?
When you say you know you are alive, what is it in you, exactly, that knows this?
a rare LOL from yours humbly and truly
Tyranny? You're the one advocating using the oppressive power of government to limit people's choices. If you can't understand the difference between not banning cloning and government mandated cloning then you are one severely confused individual.
How can this be? Wasn't he supposed to be the "Son of Gawd"? Are you saying the Big Ranger in the Sky is human? If so,how can THIS be?
and now more.
Uh,huh. More than human,while at the same time BEING human. Right.
He fully died and now is again alive.
Uh,huh. And I suppose these are facts that have also been scientifically proven?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.